EXCLUSIVE: Sanctions Against Naval Officer Who Refused COVID Vaccine Were ‘Unjustified,’ Grievance Committee Finds

A Canadian flag is seen on a Canadian Armed Forces member’s uniform in a file photo. The Canadian Press/Lars Hagberg

The warning and probation measures previously levied by the Canadian Armed Forces (CAF) against a military member for her refusal of the COVID-19 vaccine in 2021 were “unreasonable and unjustified,” an independent military administrative tribunal has ruled.

“The CAF vaccination policy was unreasonable because it was overly broad and disproportionate in its application,” wrote Nina Frid of the Military Grievances External Review Committee (MGERC) in a May 30 ruling.

“The CAF did not offer any evidence that mandatory vaccination, despite the high vaccination rate among CAF members, was necessary in every instance or in each individual case due to operational requirements.”

The CAF imposed a vaccination mandate in the fall of 2021 that lasted until October 2022 and those who did not comply were released under code 5(f)—a dishonourable discharge usually reserved for soldiers with “personal weaknesses” or other issues deemed to impose an excessive burden on the armed forces.

COVID-19 vaccination is no longer a condition of service but remains a requirement for numerous operational roles.

MGERC has issued several rulings in relation to the mandate in recent weeks and all the decisions seen by The Epoch Times have ruled that the complainant was aggrieved, with a common finding that the policy infringed on charter rights and that some of its provisions are unconstitutional and thus invalid.

The rulings are not binding and are sent to Chief of Defence Staff Gen. Wayne Eyre for his consideration.

“It’s important to note that the recommendations and findings from the MGERC are part of the grievance process, which in this case, is not yet complete. Additional review by the [Chief of Defence Staff] is still underway,” said Department of National Defence (DND) spokesperson Jessica Lamirande in a previous statement.

On Nov. 5, 2021, the CAF lieutenant-commander who filed the grievance applied for exemption from the vaccine mandate on the grounds that “consent to a medical treatment must be informed” and she argued that the timelines under the CAF vaccination policy were “insufficient to consult medical personnel and provide informed consent.”

Her commanding officer denied the application 10 days later, saying that she had “not articulated a valid ground for discrimination under the Canadian Human Rights Act” and her “right to exercise bodily autonomy is not a protected ground.”

On Nov. 26, she was placed on “Recorded Warning” (RW) for not complying with the military’s vaccination requirement, then directed to get fully vaccinated within 35 days, which she eventually did.

Ruling

The lieutenant-commander submitted a grievance to MGERC in early December 2021. Several days later she received a notice of intent from the CAF “to initiate Counselling and Probation (C&P) due to her continued non-compliance with the vaccination policy.”

C&P is one of the CAF’s “remedial measures,“ which it describes as ”serious steps to assist a CAF member in overcoming their conduct or performance deficiency.”

On May 30, Frid issued her ruling saying that CAF’s disciplinary treatment of the lieutenant-commander for her refusal to be vaccinated was “unjustified.”

“Since the administration of the [remedial measure] pursuant to the CAF’s vaccination policy had significant procedural fairness shortcomings, I find that the RW and the C&P issued under that policy were unreasonable and unjustified,” Frid wrote. She added that non-compliance with the vaccination policy did not constitute an inability to overcome a “conduct deficiency.”

“Besides, basic procedural fairness is expected in the administration of [remedial measures] and these essential considerations were set aside by the CAF vaccination policy.”

MGERC has recommended that the grievor be redressed by the CAF cancelling the remedial measures and removing them from her records.

The grievor is part of a $500 million class action lawsuit filed on June 21 by current and past CAF members affected by the vaccination policy.

Matthew Horwood contributed to this report.